Proceeding contribution from Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 20 May 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HC) and Debate on bill on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords].
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
Has the hon. Gentleman actually read the wording of the original Act that this will amend? Let me read it to him. It says,"““unless account has been taken of the welfare of any child who may be born as a result of the treatment (including the need of that child for a father””—" to which we would add ““and a mother””—"““and of any other child who may be affected by the birth.””" How does that provision act as an absolute device to refuse treatment?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 476 c182
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Children's rights Abortion Cohabitation Absent parents Counselling Women Fertility Homosexuality Human rights Human embryo experiments Eligibility IVF Discrimination Fathers Parents Married people Single people Women's rights
- Legislation
- Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-10-21 14:47:50 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474400
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474400
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474400